From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69F9ACDB465 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:47:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC03A3CEDCD for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:47:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (in-3.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 103F93C84BD for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:46:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40C961BBB469 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:46:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE1A21A8C; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:46:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from g78 (unknown [10.163.25.62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B72A2C497; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:46:55 +0000 (UTC) References: <20231016184408.879977-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <87r0lswdep.fsf@suse.de> <20231019072208.GB33886@pevik> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.7; emacs 29.1 From: Richard Palethorpe To: Petr Vorel Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 08:34:02 +0100 Organization: Linux Private Site In-reply-to: <20231019072208.GB33886@pevik> Message-ID: <87il73vytu.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=softfail (smtp-out1.suse.de: 149.44.160.134 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of rpalethorpe@suse.de) smtp.mailfrom=rpalethorpe@suse.de X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.77 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[rpalethorpe@suse.de]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-3.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.20)[suse.de]; R_SPF_SOFTFAIL(0.60)[~all:c]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; VIOLATED_DIRECT_SPF(3.50)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[149.44.160.134:from]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.20)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-0.02)[51.99%] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: EFE1A21A8C X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.1 at in-3.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [RFC PATCH 0/7] Remove scsi testsuite + various testscripts X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: rpalethorpe@suse.de Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hello, Petr Vorel writes: > Hi Richie, all, > > thanks for your review, merged. > >> Hello, > >> Petr Vorel writes: > >> > Hi, > >> > cleanup of 2 old scsi testsuites and some of legacy testscripts. >> > IMHO the testsuites are not worth of fixing. > >> Very good. My only suggestion is to leave a tombstone in the >> documentation (or github issues) any time we delete something big and >> the thing it was supposed to test still should be tested. > > I understand the need of missing coverage, preferably over github issue > (we document missing coverage over github issues already). > > I wonder what should be noted in this case. These test scripts attempted to test: > * autofs (run other tests on autofs actually) > * BIO (we still have testcases/kernel/device-drivers/tbio/) > * sysfs (but we have at least some sysfs tests) > * SCSI (I suppose these will be better handled elsewhere - xfstests have > scsi_debug file, mention scsi in some generic and xfs specific tests) > * device mapper tests (there is something ruby based: > https://github.com/jthornber/device-mapper-test-suite from Joe Thornber from Red > Hat) > >> Something like "There was a testsuite called X, it appeared to do >> Y, but we had to remove it because of Z". > >> It could be useful when answering questions about test feasability and >> for SEO. > > I'm not sure if this 20 years old code deserves this description (but feel free > to write it if you think so). But identifying missing coverage is of course > important. Maybe we could have a special wiki page which would link missing > coverage issues [1], but also highlight the most important ones (big subsystem > missing) and also point out what we consider being tested elsewhere or what > would be hard to test with LTP thus should be tested elsewhere. I suppose if the test suite did not do anything interesting, then it's not useful. > > Kind regards, > Petr > > [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/labels/missing%20coverage -- Thank you, Richard. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp